On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 05:17:07AM +0800, Murali Karicheri wrote: > > Sorry, my previous response was in html and not sure it has made to the > list. I did > get an error as well. So resending my response. > > On 6/18/2014 6:14 AM, Mohit KUMAR DCG wrote: > > Hello Murali, > > > [...] > *pos = pos0; > > @@ -349,7 +353,10 @@ static int dw_msi_setup_irq(struct msi_chip *chip, > struct pci_dev *pdev, > > */ > > desc->msi_attrib.multiple = msgvec; > > -msg.address_lo = virt_to_phys((void *)pp->msi_data); > > +if (pp->ops->get_msi_data) > > +msg.address_lo = pp->ops->get_msi_data(pp); > > +else > > +msg.address_lo = virt_to_phys((void *)pp->msi_data); > > msg.address_hi = 0x0; > > msg.data = pos; > > > What about this code? This requires get_msi_data() as well pp->msi_data is set in dw_pcie_msi_init, which is a global function called from vendor specific code. You can have your own keystone_pcie_msi_init and then you do not need above changes. > > > -- 3rd to use pp->ops->msi_set/clear if defined. > Why not API enhancement and refactor the code in a single patch? Yes, can be. You can send changes in 2 or 3 patches as you wish, but I believe that should be able to solve problem in best way. Regards Pratyush > > Murali > > Pls let us know for any issue or have different opinion. > > > > Regards > > Mohit > > > > > > > > > >> -- > >> 1.7.9.5 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-pci" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
